51026
Precedential
Processed
State v. Butler
State v. Butler, 250 So. 2d 740 (La. 1971).
Cited by
- State v. Foret 479 So. 2d 526 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1985
- State v. Lott 434 So. 2d 1274 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1983
- State v. Gainey 376 So. 2d 1240 La. 1979
- State v. Stevenson 334 So. 2d 195 La. 1976
- State v. James 305 So. 2d 514 La. 1974
- State v. Michelli 301 So. 2d 577 La. 1974
- State v. Clark 288 So. 2d 612 La. 1974
- State v. Smith 275 So. 2d 733 La. 1973
- State v. Parrish 272 So. 2d 321 La. 1973
- State v. Journigan 267 So. 2d 568 La. 1972
- State v. Baker 259 So. 2d 306 La. 1972
- State v. Raby 253 So. 2d 370 La. 1971
Opinion text
HAMLIN, Justice (dissenting) : It is my view that the defendant was tried and convicted upon the Bill of Information as worded in printing and typewriting, before the erroneous amendment in handwriting was made. It is my further view that the words, “whereby human life was endangered,” when considered with the word, “intentionally,” (which was charged in the information) encompass “foreseeability,” and that “foreseeability” is a matter of evidence. The evidence must show “foreseeability.” Apparently the jury believed that the evidence did so. I respectfully dissent.